Bono Partners With Monsanto?

[mama cass]

pah sneaky

 

[gvox]

Gabe, please stop being mean to me.

 

[gvox]

Actually, I addressed *I* directly...if Gabe want to do that, I'm fine with it. And trust me, Gabe's comments to me had nothing to do with anything I said in this post. Watch...Gabe will respond to your comment, not to anything I've said.

1. We are not on a first name basis. Have I ever introduced myself to you? No. If your name is even Nick, fine, that's your choice to use that as part of your screenname. I clearly have not made that same choice. Others here use my name because we are somewhat cool. You and I are not cool, and we never will be. Thanks.

2. See? I responded directly to your comment. You are the king of disingenously using passive aggressive comments to throw shit my way, you've been doing it non-stop and you think you're cute. You're not. You're a massive pain in the ass, and as I've asked you a million times, stay the heck away from me.

3. Your argument was massively ridiculous, absurd, retarded, etc. Your argument. If you want to own that argument and label yourself those things, go right on ahead.

 

[Nick66]

1. We are not on a first name basis. Have I ever introduced myself to you? No. If your name is even Nick, fine, that's your choice to use that as part of your screenname. I clearly have not made that same choice. Others here use my name because we are somewhat cool. You and I are not cool, and we never will be. Thanks.

2. See? I responded directly to your comment. You are the king of disingenously using passive aggressive comments to throw shit my way, you've been doing it non-stop and you think you're cute. You're not. You're a massive pain in the ass, and as I've asked you a million times, stay the heck away from me.

3. Your argument was massively ridiculous, absurd, retarded, etc. Your argument. If you want to own that argument and label yourself those things, go right on ahead.

I'll remind that you weren't even involved in the discussion I was having with someone else when you decided to inject yourself into it to throw yet another series of insults my way. And here's some more insults from you. So please, drop the "stay the heck away from me" pretence. I never address you except to respond to stuff like this. And even then I never respond to you with the name calling and insults you regularly send my way.

Fry crying out loud, just stop. Put me on ignore if I bother you so much, but let it go.

 

[No spoken words]

let it go.

We're an Irish band. We come from Dublin City, Ireland. Like all cities, it has its good, it has its bad. This is a song called Bad.

 

[gvox]

I never address you except to respond to stuff like this. And even then I never respond with the name calling, vitriol and insults you regularly send my way.

Fry crying out loud, just stop. Put me on ignore if I bother you so much, but let it go.

Please. This is a patent lie and everyone knows it. You regularly use indirect ways to insult me and get your digs in.

Who gives a shit? If you had actually gone by what the mods said back when, ie YOU ignore me also, we wouldn't even be having this discussion.

Instead, we have this cutesy-poo shit that you initiate 9 times out of 10.

Now what? You drag some quotes out, compile a big list?

Let's see if you can completely ignore my posts. You've never done it, so it'll be interesting to see if you can.

 

[Nick66]

Please. This is a patent lie and everyone knows it. You regularly use indirect ways to insult me and get your digs in.

I'll let the facts speak for themselves. We are only here because you chose to inject yourself into a conversation that had nothing to do with you, and take the opportunity to throw some insults my way, again. As a simple review of this thread will demonstrate that, I see no need to continue.

Good day to you.

 

[Diemen]

Please. This is a patent lie and everyone knows it. You regularly use indirect ways to insult me and get your digs in.

Who gives a shit? If you had actually gone by what the mods said back when, ie YOU ignore me also, we wouldn't even be having this discussion.

Instead, we have this cutesy-poo shit that you initiate 9 times out of 10.

Now what? You drag some quotes out, compile a big list?

Let's see if you can completely ignore my posts. You've never done it, so it'll be interesting to see if you can.

You've got some fucking balls daring someone else to let something go. After how long, and how many pointless arguments, closed threads, warnings, etc... You're still at it and you think it's just because he can't let it go?



Also, nice of you to bring up the mods' previous warning, because it applies to both of you, and includes the childish little passive aggressive jabs and barbs you both like to casually drop and then pretend you didn't do anything.

Sorry if you find the diplomacy lacking in this comment, but I'm sick of this crap. Everyone is sick of this crap. Your crap, Nick's crap, the whole juvenile relationship you guys insist on continuing. You both keep insisting the other should ignore you, but neither one of you is capable of doing what you're whining the other one should do.

[/rant]

 

[nickoslo]

bono should be rock star again, not politician

 

[david]

Bono needs to start ordering pizzas for people again. I hope he does that on the next tour. FEED THE WORLD!

 

[Von Schloopen]

yes because the corporations are just giving the money away asking nothing in return

They'll want to make money in return. They're investing, not donating.

have you even read into the issue?

and no, i don't think he has got that much power actually - but he is the face of ONE which supports the Alliance, he has publicly expressed his support for the Alliance, this is all over the media now, and you can bet, if and when the sh!t does hit the fan, that he will be in the firing line - check back in 20 years - i will hate to say i told you so

Have you read up on the issue? There's more than one side to it. And when one side starts throwing around "imperial, colonial" they kinda show their hand. 1/2 the companies in the alliance are African.

 

[Von Schloopen]

Also, if Monsanto GMO food is completely safe....

WHY DO THEY REFUSE TO SERVE THEIR OWN PRODUCE IN THEIR OWN MONSANTO EMPLOYEE CAFETERIAS?

That's not true. That story is 15 years old and has been debunked for ages.

 

[Von Schloopen]

please enlighten us then, what exactly IS Bono's agenda you mention? i would love to know! because if it's about "feeding Africa", then pushing the local rural communities off their land may not be the best way to do it...

This hasn't been established. Monboit can't point to once actual instance of this happening. He says it's already happening in Mozambique, but doesn't reference a news story or first hand account. He points to a G8 document outlining the program he is assailing:

http://feedthefuture.gov/sites/defa... Coop Framework ENG FINAL w.cover REVISED.pdf

Where's the story about the evil land grabbing?

He does the same thing with Ethiopia:

http://feedthefuture.gov/sites/default/files/resource/files/Ethiopia_web.pdf

Where's the story about evil G8 land grabbing? At this point I'll take anecdotal evidence. He makes A LOT OF ASSUMPTIONS and everyone just rolls along with them as if they're gospel.

 

[Von Schloopen]

If Monsanto isn't a problem, then why are countries wary about American food exports?

After GMO Wheat Seeds Found, EU Recommends Testing U.S. Shipments

Even Japan halted U.S. wheat. How could Bono support this, I do not know. I hate to think that he has gone power hungry, but I also hate to think he's become very blind to the people he's rubbing elbows with.

Cause they're stupid? Turning a blind eye to the actual science? Hysteria? Governments have never been known for their logic.

French Government, Europe Captured By Junk Science on GMOs, Say Expert Scientists - Forbes

The government in the US thinks climate change is bullshit. Doesn't mean it's so.

 

[mama cass]

well i guess it comes down to your own values and principles, whose opinions you believe/respect and, oh yes, history

 

[Galeongirl]

Bono needs to start ordering pizzas for people again. I hope he does that on the next tour. FEED THE WORLD!

I'd be down with that.

 

[mama cass]

They'll want to make money in return. They're investing, not donating.



Have you read up on the issue? There's more than one side to it. And when one side starts throwing around "imperial, colonial" they kinda show their hand. 1/2 the companies in the alliance are African.

yes, i'm very familiar with the issue of corporate land-grabbing actually - it has been going on for years, all over the world...

this is the kind of thing people are worried about (but i have a sneaking suspicion you're not genuinely interested but what the hell...)

Guatemala's sugar cane land rush anything but sweet for corn farmers | Sibylla Brodzinsky | Global development | guardian.co.uk

Guatemala's sugar cane land rush anything but sweet for corn growers
Sugar cane and palm oil companies able to afford inflated rents are forcing Guatemala's smallholder farmers off their land

Sibylla Brodzinsky in Astillero, Guatemala
guardian.co.uk, Wednesday 26 June 2013 15.51 BST

Priced out … Guatemalan farmer Victor Manuel Vasquez tends his land. Industrial plantations are affecting livelihoods. Photograph: Juan Manuel Barrero Bueno/Oxfam

For the past decade, the corn farmers of this village in southern Guatemala managed to scratch out two harvests of maize a year from the 10 hectares (24.7 acres) of land they rent. But the crop they planted in May will be their last.

"We no longer have land to grow on because the owners of the land told us that this will be our last harvest there," says Moisés Morales, president of the Amanecer farmers' association. Sugar cane growers, they were told, had offered double the rent that the corn growers paid. The corn farmers couldn't match the price.

The plots farmed by the Amanecer members used to be among thousands of corn farms in the municipality of Taxisco. Today they are surrounded by a sea of sugar cane fields. Most small plots have been bought up and crowded out by expanding cane farms. Many corn farmers have left the area for the low foothills of nearby mountains "where cane harvesting machines can't go", says Morales.

"We're being surrounded bit by bit," he says. "We're like on a small island in the middle of all this cane."

Farmers are trapped in a land rush in Guatemala, which has one of the most unequal land distribution structures in the world. Before the spike in demand, 78% of Guatemala's arable land was in the hands of 8% of the population, according to government statistics from 2003. The trend since has been concentration of land by sugar cane and African palm companies aiming to meet demand for biofuel in Europe and the US, says Laura Hurtado, an agrarian expert with Oxfam.

Some progress on land reform was made after the end of Guatemala's civil war in 1996, when peace deals included an agreement to promote the democratisation of land structures and reverse the concentration of land. But an estimated 46% of smallholders who were granted land titles after the peace accords no longer hold them, according to Hurtado.

"It's terrible to see that, 15 years after the peace accords, the little that was won has been lost," she says. Many farmers are selling their land because of unpayable debt or crops failure – and sugar and palm companies are snapping up the bargains. Often, farmers are coerced into selling when they see their access to roads or water cut off by encroaching plantations. Others are threatened outright.

Palm and cane plantations are expanding in areas where lands have been newly titled. "The fact that newly titled farmers go into debt to plant their crops makes the lands more vulnerable to be appropriated," says Hurtado, who points out that maps of newly titled land and palm and sugar plantations overlap at many points.

Sometimes, things get violent. In 2011, more than 750 families were forcibly evicted in the Polochic valley in northern Guatemala because the owners of a sugar refinery claimed ownership of land that had been occupied by landless peasants after lying fallow for several years.

The Polochic area eviction has come to symbolise a broader struggle for land by smallholder farmers. According to the secretariat for agrarian affairs, more than 1 million people were involved in nearly 1,400 land disputes as of May.

Agriculture minister Elmer López, who has a background in development, says the government's official policy is to prevent the reconcentration of land, but that it lacks effective tools to do so. The agencies established by the peace accords to address land issues "did not receive enough support" from a succession of governments, which focused more on promoting agribusiness for export than supporting domestic food security. In addition to Guatemala's main export crops of coffee, sugar, rubber and bananas, the country exports cane and palm oil for biofuels, and baby vegetables for the US market. Cardamom, which is not used in Guatemalan cooking, is a major export product to the Middle East and India.

A rural development law that would have promoted better access to land, employment and other rights for smallholder farmers – but which stopped short of proposing all-out land reform – was thwarted in Congress last year amid opposition from large landowners and businesses that, according to López, had an "allergic reaction" to the proposals.

Paulo de Leon, director of investment consulting firm Central American Business Intelligence, says the bill was flawed because it "left open for the agriculture authorities to determine the use of land and the subject of ownership".

He questioned the need to help small-scale landholders in the first place, claiming that in 20 years 75% of Guatemala's population will shift to the cities, if urbanisation trends continue.

All the more reason, says López, for Guatemala to concentrate on rural development. "What's better: for a family to move to the city with dignity, and whose children have the skills to live well in the city, or for a family to arrive penniless with no skills other than an eternal hope that things in the city will be better?"

• Sibylla Brodzinsky travelled to Guatemala from Colombia, where she is based, on a reporting grant from Oxfam

 

[Von Schloopen]

yes, i'm very familiar with the issue of corporate land-grabbing actually - it has been going on for years, all over the world...

this is the kind of thing people are worried about (but i have a sneaking suspicion you're not genuinely interested but what the hell...)

Guatemala's sugar cane land rush anything but sweet for corn farmers | Sibylla Brodzinsky | Global development | guardian.co.uk

Yes. Corporations do bad shit. We get it.

Now, back on topic, why doesn't Monboit point to actual instances in Mozambique and Ethiopia?

Monboit seems to have a penchant for making grand declarations, then not backing them up. Like here:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2013/jun/17/bono-africans-stealing-voice-poor

Bono is stealing the voice of Africans. He won't let them speak. Hell of a polemic. Then you reread the piece and see that he NEVER QUOTES OR REFERENCES AN ACTUAL AFRICAN.

Top notch stuff.

This should bother you, but I have a sneaking suspicion you're not genuinely interested. He's making statements and not backing them up. I guess it comes down to your own values and principles, whose opinions you believe/respect and, oh yes, history & reality.

 

[mama cass]

actually i do have my own opinions on that, as i've mentioned elsewhere many times (i posted that article a few pages back btw)... and i think that particular article was a little hysterical in places, especially as it was based on Browne's book, but it does make some interesting points!

i'm sure Bono's motives are very noble, but we should remember that no-one elected him to speak for Africa, and also he works for his own organisation - maybe it would be different if he was working for an established NGO independent from corporate interests with no agenda and, that way he would have some real accountability, there would be people who could say er no, not a good idea, or support him all the way... you know, like a democracy? or do you prefer the (benevolent) dictatorial approach perhaps?

like i said, i specialised in political theory and international relations, 20th century history, it's something i'm pretty well read on actually and am passionate about, and so i feel i can make fairly informed choices on which school of thought i choose to adhere to... i've seen enough of the corporate approach and very real and historical consequences of their actions to justify my choices - i don't really care what you believe tbh - everyone has to be comfortable with their own outlook in life...

ps- what is it they say about imitation? lol

 

[Rachel D.]

Larry is a GMO.

 

[mama cass]

there are loads of oil palm plantation projects in this New Alliance as well...

Penguins support gorillas as biscuit makers respond to palm oil threat | Environment | guardian.co.uk

Penguins are coming to the aid of gorillas, according to a survey which reveals that the UK's leading biscuit manufacturers are responding to the environmental threats of palm oil production.

Many of the biggest names in biscuits including Marks & Spencer, Sainsbury's and United Biscuits – which makes some of the UK's most popular biscuits including McVitie's Digestive and Penguin – have pledged to reduce the amount of palm oil in their products.

The Rainforest Foundation UK (RFUK) and Ethical Consumer magazine together surveyed over 50 of the UK's biggest biscuit manufacturers about their use of palm oil or its derivatives.

The top scoring companies were the Co-op, M&S, Sainsbury's, Waitrose and United Biscuits. Those at the bottom of the ranking were mostly American-based companies including Asda/Walmart, PepsiCo and Kraft, makers of Ritz and Oreo biscuits.

The project was carried out in response to the increasing threat that palm oil production is posing to the world's rainforest and to the people that rely on these forests for their livelihoods. Palm oil is a core ingredient in many food products but companies are not required by EU law to label products containing it until December 2014.

Having destroyed vast areas of forest in countries including Indonesia, which is home to orangutans, the RFUK says palm oil companies are now planning to expand into the rainforests of the Congo basin in Africa, home to lowland gorillas and other threatened primates. Palm oil companies are also partly responsible for the recent devastating forest fires in Sumatra, which caused pollution episodes in Malaysia and Singapore.

Simon Counsell, executive director of The Rainforest Foundation, UK said: "UK biscuit manufacturers and retailers are showing that it is possible to outright reduce the use of palm oil, which is going to have to occur globally if large areas of Africa's rainforests are to be saved from conversion to palm plantations."

Leonie Nimmo, researcher at Ethical Consumer, added: "This survey clearly shows that environmental campaigning is having a positive impact on the palm oil policies of many companies which is something we wholeheartedly support. Consumers now have a choice in buying biscuits which are reducing the risks to both people and wildlife."

 

[kingofsorrow]

there's a conspiracy page on facebook called " we know the secrets of the federal reserve". they just posted an "article" about bono and monsanto.
the comments of course are anti bono.

 

[mama cass]

oh god no, i don't read those kind of pages...

 

[Von Schloopen]

there are loads of oil palm plantation projects in this New Alliance as well...

Penguins support gorillas as biscuit makers respond to palm oil threat | Environment | guardian.co.uk

Penguins are coming to the aid of gorillas, according to a survey which reveals that the UK's leading biscuit manufacturers are responding to the environmental threats of palm oil production.

Many of the biggest names in biscuits including Marks & Spencer, Sainsbury's and United Biscuits – which makes some of the UK's most popular biscuits including McVitie's Digestive and Penguin – have pledged to reduce the amount of palm oil in their products.

The Rainforest Foundation UK (RFUK) and Ethical Consumer magazine together surveyed over 50 of the UK's biggest biscuit manufacturers about their use of palm oil or its derivatives.

The top scoring companies were the Co-op, M&S, Sainsbury's, Waitrose and United Biscuits. Those at the bottom of the ranking were mostly American-based companies including Asda/Walmart, PepsiCo and Kraft, makers of Ritz and Oreo biscuits.

The project was carried out in response to the increasing threat that palm oil production is posing to the world's rainforest and to the people that rely on these forests for their livelihoods. Palm oil is a core ingredient in many food products but companies are not required by EU law to label products containing it until December 2014.

Having destroyed vast areas of forest in countries including Indonesia, which is home to orangutans, the RFUK says palm oil companies are now planning to expand into the rainforests of the Congo basin in Africa, home to lowland gorillas and other threatened primates. Palm oil companies are also partly responsible for the recent devastating forest fires in Sumatra, which caused pollution episodes in Malaysia and Singapore.

Simon Counsell, executive director of The Rainforest Foundation, UK said: "UK biscuit manufacturers and retailers are showing that it is possible to outright reduce the use of palm oil, which is going to have to occur globally if large areas of Africa's rainforests are to be saved from conversion to palm plantations."

Leonie Nimmo, researcher at Ethical Consumer, added: "This survey clearly shows that environmental campaigning is having a positive impact on the palm oil policies of many companies which is something we wholeheartedly support. Consumers now have a choice in buying biscuits which are reducing the risks to both people and wildlife."

That reads less like an article written by an impartial journalist and more like a RFUK press release.

 

[Von Schloopen]

oh god no, i don't read those kind of pages...

Those pages are a staple of the anti-GMO crowd.

 

[kingofsorrow]

they're also very entertaining. you should see some of the things they post.

 

[Von Schloopen]

they're also very entertaining. you should see some of the things they post.

Agreed. They're very entertaining. Frightening & entertaining.

 

[mama cass]

Those pages are a staple of the anti-GMO crowd.

yeah i know, and i don't care